I haven't read it... yet, but I would never criticize Maya Angelou...about anything...at all...but specifically poetry.

I feel the same way about Toni Morrison. Overwrought odes? Whatever you want to call them, I am glad that these women are letting their voices be heard.

I am glad Barack and Hillary each have their own Goddess (note that I do not qualify that term with the word literary).

God bless all four of them.

Apparently "overwrought odes" have nothing to do with the gushing that poured-forth about Morrison's endorsement of Barack Obama. Sweet, sweet jesus, now the hyper left-wing media is parsing poetic and literary endorsements for the two Democrats by writers who still have more to say and more ways to say it than Laura Miller ever will. Please stop. You're making me want to laugh...and puke at the same time. When I talk about "childishness," this is the epitome!

Was the purpose just to take a few swipes at two well respected authors? If you want to write a critical examination of their literature, do that. The swipes in this article supposedly about Morrison and Angelous support for Obama and Clinton seems petty and inappropriate. It also would have been nice to provide a link to the poem you so gleefully dis, as opposed to a link to other poems found on Salon.

"Specimens"?

And then playing critic while pretending to make some sort of political statement at the expense of two of the most gifted American women of letters who have ever lived?

What the hell was this really about? The reason I ask is because, frankly, the article sucked. Above and beyond pointless unless intended to discredit the two "dowager African-American literary icons" you decided to take on. And of course only a fool would do that.

The least you could do while writing this drivel is get the title of Ms. Angelou's poem right. It is "On The Pulse of Morning." Not "On The Pulse of The Morning."

I won't hold my breath until you get your Nobel Prize for Literature for your un-"overwrought odes." Watch out for that green-eyed monster, Laura Miller!!

An excellent piece. Laura Miller is a wonderful writer and consistently insightful as a literary critic. I always learn something from her. She should do more politics though, at least into the home stretch of his election. She's a valuable voice and these are critical times.

Sure sounds like someone's high school literary essay...or something. Wow, there's nothing sacred when it comes to pushing one's political candidate over the other.

How about analysing Clinton's shoes versus Obama's next? Their cars? Hairstyles? (Ooh, Clinton had that done to her already in the 90s!) Pooches? Cats? Whatever...!

The absurdity never ends.

Whatever you believe, whomever you endorse, the great thing is we have a very interesting choice before us. One that crosses genders and race and ethnicity. For the first time I've ever been around, it's a really broad choice to choose from. I'm only saddened because John Edwards and Dennis Kucinich are not still among them. But I believe people are basing their opinions on serious thought and consideration as opposed to their color, sex, or personal issues. Four years ago, this would never be happening. It gives a baby boomer some hope.

Wacky

Heavy on snark and light on any kind of substantive analysis —whether of literary merit or political significance — this is the kind of political commentary that provides no insight or understanding of our political process or the choices of candidates. Its only purpose, I suppose, must be to increase our cynicism and disgust, both for our politics and (unintentionally) our press — which we need no help with, thank you. If Angelou’s and Morrison’s public endorsements really were as empty and awful as Miller claims, they should have just been ignored rather than given this sort of thoroughly unilluminating, and bewilderingly mean-spirited, treatment. I , for one, don’t think what I’ve read of Morrison’s statement is at all unclear or obscure; in any case its "lofty concepts" are certainly no more lacking in clarity than Miller’s snide article, and at least the portions I’ve seen excerpted read considerably better.

Laura's ode to Hillary: "How do I hate thee, let me count the ways." Take a deep breath, Ms. Miller, it's only poetry!

My, my, my Ms. Miller. Your "critique" (and I use that word ve-r-r-y loosely) of Maya Angelou and Toni Morrison sound eerily like the exhibition by the British and the later dissection by the French of the late South African woman, Saarti Baartman known as the "Hottentot Venus." Look up her story and maybe you'll not use the word "specimens" to refer to Black women again - or maybe you will.

Ms. Miller's article is a prime example of why most Americans despise, do not trust, and try to ignore the media's spin on this election.

Many of you columnists seem to think that if you are clever enough in your wording, and use big enough words, no one will notice that you are mean and petty.

Let's look at the disgusting attack language in this article

about Maya Angelou:

"Most likely it was amid the fug of complacency you'd expect to find lingering around a writer who has already been voted one of the 10 most admired women in America."

YOU are the one who has decided she is complacent. You show very clearly your resentment of the honors bestowed upon her.

In discussing her work, you put the word poem in quotes ("poem")indicating your contempt for her work, and your judgment that she doesn't really write "poetry."

"Pro forma invocation of strong womanhood"..

That's YOUR judgment. I didn't find it pro forma and what's wrong with celebrating strong women?

"pablum as a crypto-postmodern witticism in which Clinton's implied promise to deliver a known quantity to the White House is mirrored by slogans so standardized they seem to have been extruded from the machines that make the plastic toys for McDonald's."

What the hell does this MEAN? Who knows?

We do know that it couples a nasty attack on Maya Angelou who has made a bad move (supporting Sen. Clinton who the media does NOT like)

We know that it's an attack on Sen. Clinton who the media hates. This week it's once again okay to trash her!

Angelou has come to "specialize in churning out inspirational and affirming mottos, suitable for taping on the bathroom mirrors of the self-esteem impaired."

Can you sink no lower in your attacks? Here you heap contempt on those struggling with low self-esteem, attack Angelou's poetry, and attack those who like her poetry and find it inspirational and affirming. Maybe you should read it.

What exactly is MORRISON talking about (you ask later in this vile piece). What are YOU talking about?

Have you yourself read Morrison or Angelou to the end?